News Samsung Unleashes 57-inch 8K Mini-LED, 49-inch OLED Neo Gaming Monitors

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
7680 x*2160 is not 8K, it is 2x4K which is only half the pixels of 8K. I bet it is just TG that got it wrong and not Samsung.

4K is 2192021080 = 38402160
8k is 4192041080 = 76804320
 
I like the width, but for me it needs more height.

In 1st person view it would be like looking out of a slit visor.

Edit : Has for price if you have to ask it is not for you. Lets look at the words used Gaming, 8k and curve and fast refresh it is going to be 4090 price. DisplayPort 2.1 shame the card that could drive it does not do that standard :O
 
OneMoreUser said:
7680 x*2160 is not 8K, it is 2x4K which is only half the pixels of 8K. I bet it is just TG that got it wrong and not Samsung.

4K is 2192021080 = 38402160
8k is 4192041080 = 76804320
Click to expand...
It actually is 8k. It's just not in a 16:9 ratio. 2k,4k,8k only refers to the horizontal pixels.
 
Those super-wide monitors kinda creep me out. Every time I look at them I get the feeling the middle of the monitor is slowly being peeled apart by the weight of each side. Those middle pixels slowly tearing, screaming as they are torn in half... 🤣
 
I'm happy with my three Samsung RU8000 55" 4K TVs with Freesync in surround mode. 11,520x2160 (which is still not 8K). 180* viewing, and more than enough height so it doesn't look like you're looking through a visor.
 
People never understand that 8K is 4x 4K in the same way 4k is 4x 1080p, it's not intuitive so people always screw it up. But then again a 7680x2160 monitor is 8K along one axis and for a marketing department that's enough to put it on the box.
 
Ar558 said:
People never understand that 8K is 4x 4K in the same way 4k is 4x 1080p, it's not intuitive so people always screw it up. But then again a 7680x2160 monitor is 8K along one axis and for a marketing department that's enough to put it on the box.
Click to expand...

Technically speaking, 4K is not 4 x Full HD, since it's 4096 x 2160, not 3840 x 2160, and Full HD is not the same as 1080p, since the latter refers to the broadcasting signal. Renowned sources shouldn't use these terms interchangeably.
 
Considering the price and short warranty this should not be on anyone's top monitors list. The best monitor for me is still a 3 monitor set-up. Can't go wrong with a cheap 32" 16:9 monitor as your main one.
 
I very much like the concept - essentially like two 4KUHD monitors side by side, but no gap in the middle.

Pretty sure I won't like the price enough to part with my two 27-inch Dells.
 
voyteck said:
Technically speaking, 4K is not 4 x Full HD, since it's 4096 x 2160, not 3840 x 2160, and Full HD is not the same as 1080p, since the latter refers to the broadcasting signal. Renowned sources shouldn't use these terms interchangeably.
Click to expand...
I think it depends which standards you use but most people mean 38402160 for 4K and 19201080 for both 1080p and Full HD. Technically at 4K there is two standards 4K and DCI 4K which uses the higher res but my point still stands.
 
Wow that 57" is perfect and exactly what I've been waiting for! Too bad I won't be able to afford it because of the price of 4090's which is my upgrade for this year lol. I already have a 49" a couple years old now and while I'm not fussed about getting a higher resolution at all because 1440 is perfect, I do feel that physically it isn't tall enough. Hell it might take until 2024 to actually become available anyway. I just want to mention that I used to game at 7680x1440 with a triple monitor setup no problem way back in 2012, 2160 vertical is quite the increase yes but overall I don't think that kind of resolution is very crazy to be honest. My 1080Ti now still runs the latest games on highest quality settings at 5120x1440 on my 49" (but getting too far under 60FPS in some titles hence the upgrade), a 4090 should take 7680x2160 in stride quite easily.
 
Interesting, DisplayPort 2.1 on the Samsung Neo monitors.

I think this is the first monitor I've seen with DisplayPort 2.1 support. I assume it is DP80 and not DP40.

I don't know where Nvidia is with DP80 support. I think AMD is releasing graphics cards with DP80 in 2023.

*

https://news.samsung.com/global/sam...ing-the-next-generation-of-display-technology

"It also boasts the world’s first DisplayPort 2.1 support, which transfers data approximately twice as fast as the previously used DisplayPort 1.4. In addition, the new DP2.1 allows lossless industry-standard Display Stream Compression (DSC) to transmit information without distortion. "

DP80 2.1 is about 2.6 times faster that DP 1.4a. It's wierd that Samsung says its DisplayPort 2.1 port is "approximately twice as fast as the previously used DisplayPort 1.4". That means the Samsung DP2.1 port does not support UHBR 20 - but, peaks at UHBR13.5. Interesting.

Maybe this means that 2023 is going to be the year of USB 4.0 version 1 (40 Gb/s).
I guess USB 4.0 v2 (80 Gb/s) is going to come later.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom